Category: Pure information

This is the short version of the article. If you have time for the longer version, click here. I would like to address a few sociological concerns of mine regarding the pursuit of reality. I believe that since the ideas in our head control our whole lives, it is important to question where they originate.

They can come from us conforming to the group in fear of standing out, or simply because we don’t have the time and the means necessary to verify each information ourselves. We must then often rely on more qualified authorities to do so (officials, scientists, journalists …). Also, the more ambiguous a situation is, the more people are likely to go against what they already know. This influence is exploited by information sources and may result in people losing their self-awareness.

Furthermore, the majority of people agree on a consensus reality that is heavily spread through mainstream and social media. However, the centralization and the censorship of these prevent them from being reliable sources of information. That there is general agreement upon something does not make it true.

Finally, another issue arises when people project their desires on to reality, or their perceptions of reality. A false belief has the power to shape our behaviour in a way that that belief becomes true in the end. A typical everyday example is when a teacher has low expectations for a student and transmits his perception to the student, so that the student performs worse than s.he otherwise would.

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

What I wished to bring out in this article were the dangers of consensus reality and of confusing the perception of reality with reality itself. Relying on authorities is inevitable, but we mustn’t lose our self-awareness. It is important not to act upon inconsistent thoughts or beliefs, and to be skeptical when using mainstream and social media. Not to confuse skepticism and denial.

Clicking on “Continue reading” will open the original full version of the article, with a longer introduction and more illustrated information, and the references that helped me to write it.

In this article, I would like to go back on an excuse of non-vegan people that I have heard. I don’t mean “excuse” in a judgemental way. On the contrary, a lack of information does not make a person bad. However, after observing the thinking process of misinformed people when announcing them “you are vegan”, a pattern is undeniable : a mix of guilt (usually not coming from the vegan person) and survival instinct leads to protecting oneself with excuses. So I won’t call them otherwise. Many convinced and now informed vegans did ask themselves the same questions.

“Plants also feel pain. Killing plants is still killing.”

Assuming that slicing a carrot and the throat of a cow involves the same amount of suffering, it is first important to remember that 16 times more plants (in weigh) are killed in the production of animal products than vegan products. Close to 70% of the deforestation in the Amazon rainforest is linked to cattle ranching. In France, 46% of all plants produced are used to feed the animals to be eaten, while only 26% are for human nutrition. One cow is fed with approximately 70 kg of plants per day! So in order to minimize the killing of all living beings, a plant-based diet is still much more viable than an omnivore one.

However, the assumption made previously – that plants feel pain – lacks substance, and does not justify the actual pain inflicted on non-human animals.

Clicking on “Continue reading” will open two very important sections that I intended to start my article with, but I ended up highlighting the pain “minimization” aspect of the vegan movement.